We don’t need to teach crew how to perform tasks; we need to teach them how to understand risks

Life onboard is becoming increasingly less predictable. From procedural knowledge volatility to the societal changes of globalization and its deep impact on human interactions and behaviors.

how do we arm our crew for a risk that we can’t –presently- imagine?

While change and unpredictability are already problematic for many, there are no signs of things calming. If we accept that the role of a procedural knowledge -commonly known as "know-how"- is to pre-assess an existing risk and provide crew with the best prêt-à-porter understanding, skills and values for a safer work environment; then how do we arm our crew for a risk that we can’t –presently- imagine? Do we even need knowledge in a world of step-by-step detailed procedures? Is the skill of agility more valuable than the gaining of procedural knowledge? 

It’s staggering to me as to how much the work related risks have changed, and how little procedures have.

We’ve prioritized the acquisition of procedural knowledge around what we assume would lead to “safety”. For much of maritime history, knowledge was rooted in Plato’s definition: it was centered on the criteria that knowledge must be justified, true, and believed; which served well when captains were mighty gods onboard. ISM code revolution saw a drastic shift away from this definition to a way of maximizing performance in a written-manual /record-keeping centric work environment.

Safety onboard has, however, eroded over the years. We complained about the poor skills of college graduates, and we’ve assumed that the way forward is to ensure that graduates are trained for longer periods and for every imaginable skill before joining and then frequently thereafter. Crew complained about the extensive tasks to accomplish, and we’ve assumed that the way forward is to ensure that every task is provided with a detailed static procedure and checklist. In a world where the only constant is change, can we afford to stay still and keep managing our assets by static procedural knowledge?

I think that the constantly evolving onboard work environment means that we need to prepare our crew in a totally different way. A fresh graduate today will be in command in-after 2030 that is so incomprehensible that we need a re-imagination of the very foundation of our safety management systems. It’s our cliched hope that providing more procedural knowledge will best prepare crew for a future of different operational risks. But is it that essential in a world of full automation and the soon to come artificial intelligence? Many think task management -by making more procedures and checklists- is the solution, but don’t we already have a checklist for every set of checklists? It’s staggering to me as to how much the work related risks have changed, and how little procedures have. Our safety vision for the future needs to focus on risks rather than on tasks.

when we’re more likely to be dealing with non-identified risks and tasks, maybe it’s not something we should prioritize.

Current safety management systems seem outward-in. It prioritizes procedural knowledge above all else. It is examined and rewarded in audits and inspections. The best performers onboard are those who can most easily recall procedures and exhibit related records, which was pretty helpful until now, where most risks were pre-assessed and mitigated by procedures and checklists. In an environment of constant change, being able to identify, analyze, evaluate, set preventive/recovery controls, and understand all sides of the risk equation are far more vital than merely knowing procedures, remembering checklists and parlaying it back robotically.

I’m not saying that it’s a waste of time to have good written procedural knowledge, but I’m not sure that it’s a priority to be perfect at it. Kids will struggle to communicate if they can’t spell at all, but when spell-checkers auto translate and software handles voice-to-text, maybe it’s not something to take up much time. Similarly crew will struggle to perform their tasks if there is no procedural knowledge at all, but when we’re more likely to be dealing with non-identified risks and tasks, maybe it’s not something we should prioritize.

The future of onboard safety is less about what to add/remove from safety management systems, but rather what to refocus on.

Each and every one of us is born curious and creative. Work environment and procedural knowledge somehow dilutes that. The greatest lever of value that we’ve ever known is the power of recognizing and understanding patterns. We’ve no idea what skills will be needed in the years to come, what risks will exist; it’s a bold person who thinks that all risks will be managed by incremental procedural knowledge. We have to get better at being more malleable and adept at identifying, analyzing, evaluating, setting preventive/recovery controls, and understanding all sides of the risk equation.

The future of onboard safety is less about what to add/remove from safety management systems, but rather what to refocus on. I believe that understanding risk equation around any intended tasks –rather than the step-by-step procedure- is the key attribute to developing robust, balanced crew fit to embrace the continuously changing environment. Crew need to acquire the ability to assess the surrounding risks before being explicitly identified in the procedures. Crew need to acquire the capacity to evolve, explore and learn from the study of onboard risk patterns, and make predictions on available data. Only by such reasoning, we will overcome static procedural knowledge limitations and improve safety onboard by making data driven decisions on then available sample data inputs.

If we foster creativity, fuel curiosity and empower our crew to be totally self-reliant by understanding surrounding risks. They will be agile, adaptable to change and will achieve a safety level we can’t yet foresee. We don’t need to change everything now, but we do need to start forgetting the assumptions that we have made about procedural knowledge, because the future is more uncertain than ever…

Note: Argument above is that we need to change the way we address things in our management systems. Regarding the below equation, it is not intended to be used on board by crew as it is. It would be crazy to suggest such a thing. The equation is intended to be used by staff with more advance knowledge to train, to coach, etc.

One comment below framed it perfectly by saying "I think the challenge is to get the methodology behind safety into an easy to use methodology that operational staff can use". To do that we need to have a good understanding ashore and then we can start the journey by having our Senior Officers properly understand the concept of measuring risk and then may be one day we can get it to the bottom line …

Full size Risk Equation below:

Please provide feedback to improve the Risk Equation

(Editable data can be provided on request).

If you valued this post, please hit "Like" button and also share via your Linkedin, Twitter, Google+ and Facebook social media platforms. I encourage you to join the conversation or ask questions, so feel free to add a comment on this post. Please follow my Linkedin post page for all my posts.

Note: Above reflects my opinion without intending to sound like a scholar on the subject or like somebody who is preaching the gospel. Views expressed in this post don't necessarily reflect the views of any organization I may be associated with.

{Please inform me if you find any error or typo}